Favorite Fantasy Series (High or Low)?

[Akri]

The magical dildo-shaped torture devices used to **** people don't actually count as magic torture dildos? Really?

Not to get too far off track, but if you think that a straight rod the width of a finger is "dildo-shaped" you need better toys.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

Not to get too far off track, but if you think that a straight rod the width of a finger is "dildo-shaped" you need better toys.

Much more dildoic than Dinwar's counterexample of a rope.

Still, add all the times it's used for obvious BDSM for teenaged readers to masturbate to in column A, and all the times it's used for anything else in column B. Which wins?

 

[Akri]

Much more dildoic than Dinwar's counterexample of a rope.

Still, add all the times it's used for obvious BDSM for teenaged readers to masturbate to in column A, and all the times it's used for anything else in column B. Which wins?

Are we talking about the first book or the whole series? In the first book the training scenes all have BDSM overtones, but through the rest of the series the agiel is simply a weapon. The overtones through the rest of the series have very little to do with BDSM, and much more to do with concepts of self-harm.

And Dinwar' wasn't trying to say that rope is just as dildo-like as the agiel, but that it's just as sexual as the agiel. And he's completely correct. If you're thinking in BDSM terms rope is incredibly sexual, but otherwise it's just a tool. If you're thinking in BDSM terms then the agiel is a sex toy, but otherwise it's simply a weapon. A knife would have been a better example than rope, but the concept still works.

 

[Brian-M]

OT: It occurs to me that I never mentioned the Redwall books. I loved those as a kid. And have been known to use "Eulalia" as a warcry when gaming.

Long, long time since I read any, but Redwall is only good for two or three books. After that, you can't help but noticing how formulaic they are. Most of the books share about 80% of the same plot, disguised with minor variations.

The peace is disturbed by some kind of nefarious vermin plot, some of the inhabitants embark on a quest (to rescue the victims, stop the plot, recover the stolen item, ect) and the story splits between them and those left back at the abbey. Invariably the key to success will be wrapped up in some kind of tricky and completely pointless verbal puzzle. Somewhere along the line there'll be a brief vision or dream about Martin (was that his name?), the founder of the abbey. At the end of the book there's always the celebratory feast.

And if you really want to over-analyze things, if you take the time to ponder the racial stereotypes, they become somewhat disturbing. Whether you're good or evil, honest or thieving, all seems to depend on what species you happened to be born as. Good and evil seems to be innate and hereditary characteristics, not a matter of free will.

 

[Akri]

Long, long time since I read any, but Redwall is only good for two or three books. After that, you can't help but noticing how formulaic they are. Most of the books share about 80% of the same plot, disguised with minor variations.

Eh, I was never bothered by it being formulaic. Yeah it was the same plot in different trappings each time, but I enjoyed the trappings. It's like watching a police drama on tv. Sure you can see most of the twists coming (they've sent the guy off to the DA and there's still ten minutes left in the episode? Time for Castle or Beckett to suddenly realize they got the wrong man) but that's ok because you enjoy the ride anyway. Obviously how well it works for you depends on how much you like the ride in question. In the case of Redwall being overly fond of cute furry things probably helps a bit

And if you really want to over-analyze things, if you take the time to ponder the racial stereotypes, they become somewhat disturbing. Whether you're good or evil, honest or thieving, all seems to depend on what species you happened to be born as. Good and evil seems to be innate and hereditary characteristics, not a matter of free will.

As always, there's an xkcd for that.

And having owned rats as pets, I gotta say that they really don't deserve being cast as the villains the way they are in Redwall. They're generally friendly and very caring toward one another. Lots of rat owners have stories off one rat getting ill and the others bringing him food, laying on him to keep him warm, etc.

Now mice, on the other hand, are evil.

 

[Gilmar]

Someday I'll have another go at the 10-volume Chronicles of an Age of Darkness by the late Hugh Cook. There was an abortive US publication of the first three-and-a-half books; I managed to get UK editions of all 10 and read thru the 4th. I'm not sure how to characterize them -- slightly humorous fantasy, in a Vancean rather than Pratchettian way?

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

I'll repeat here that I regard Wizard's First Rule as the worst book I've ever read.

But to qualify as such means that I must have read it - and I did, all of it. I have encountered books that might be even worse - ones that were ungrammatical or downright incoherent. But I didn't read those, and I did read Wizard's First Rule. There is a strange kind of fascination in such unremitting awfulness.

I can't blame anyone for reading one book in the series. But if you then decide to pick up a second volume, you're on your own.

But you've missed out on awesome scenes like the "chicken that was not a chicken":

Hissing, hackles lifting, the chicken's head rose.
Kahlan pulled back.
Its claws digging into stiff dead flesh, the chicken slowly turned to face her. It cocked its head, making its comb flop, its wattles sway.
"Shoo," Kahlan heard herself whisper.
There wasn't enough light, and besides, the side of its beak was covered with gore, so she couldn't tell if it had the dark spot. But she didn't need to see it.
"Dear spirits, help me," she prayed under her breath.
The bird let out a slow chicken cackle. It sounded like a chicken, but in her heart she knew it wasn't. In that instant, she completely understood the concept of a chicken that was not a chicken. This looked like a chicken, like most of the Mud People's chickens. But this was no chicken.
This was evil manifest.
[...]

Her power, her magic, was also a weapon of defense. But it would only work on people. It would not work on a chicken. And it would not work on wickedness incarnate.
Her gaze flicked toward the door, checking the distance. The chicken took a single hop toward her. Claws gripping Juni's upper arm, it leaned her way. Her leg muscles tightened till they trembled.
The chicken backed up a step, tensed, and spurted feces onto Juni's face.
It let out the cackle that sounded like a laugh.
She dearly wished she could tell herself she was being silly. Imagining things.
But she knew better.
[...]

Kahlan frantically tried to think as the chicken bawk-bawk-bawked.
[...]

"Mother," the chicken croaked.
Kahlan flinched with a cry.
[... Kahlan knocks over a candle by mistake, plunging the barn into darkness]

In the dark, the chicken thing let out a low chicken cackle laugh.
It hadn't come from where she expected the chicken to be. It was behind her.
"Please, I mean no harm," she called into the darkness. "I mean no disrespect. I will leave you to your business now, if that's all right with you."
She took another shuffling step toward the door. She moved carefully, slowly, in case the chicken thing was in the way. She didn't want to bump into it and make it angry. She mustn't underestimate it.
Kahlan had on any number of occasions thrown herself with ferocity against seemingly invincible foes. She knew well the value of a resolute violent attack. But she also somehow knew beyond doubt that this adversary could, if it wanted, kill her as easily as she could wring a real chicken's neck. If she forced a fight, this was one she would lose.
[...]

The chicken thing let out a whispering cackle.
[... she's trying to find the door, she's crying and panicking, she stubs her toe and falls down.]

With the next flash of lightning, she saw chicken feet standing between her and the crack under the door. The thing wasn't more than a foot from her face.
[...]

The beak pinched the vein on the back of her hand over her eyes. The chicken tugged, as if trying to pull a worm from the ground.
It was a command. It wanted her hand away from her eyes.
The beak gave a sharp tug on her skin. There was no mistaking the meaning in that insistent yank. Move the hand, now, it was saying, or you'll be sorry.
If she made it angry, there was no telling what it was capable of doing to her. Juni lay dead above her as a reminder of the possibilities.
She told herself that if it pecked at her eyes, she would have to grab it and try to wring its neck. If she was quick, it could only get in one peck. She would have one eye left. She would have to fight it then. But only if it went for her eyes.
Her instincts screamed that such action would be the most foolish, dangerous thing she could do. Both the Bird Man and Richard said this was not a chicken. She no longer doubted them. But she might have no choice.
If she started, it would be a fight to the death. She held no illusion as to her chances. Nonetheless, she might be forced to fight it. With her last breath, if need be, as her father had taught her.
The chicken snatched a bigger beakful of her skin along with the vein and twisted. Last warning.
Kahlan carefully moved her trembling hand away. The chicken-thing cackled softly with satisfaction.

And the evil anti-war protesters (three guesses as to what real life events inspired this fantasy):

They raced out from the long shadows of the buildings and poured around the corner. The people off at the end of the street all turned when they spotted Richard's force coming. More people--men and women from the city--surged into the street in front of the compound of buildings the soldiers had taken oup as barracks and a command post. The people looked like a scraggly lot.
"No war! No war! No war!" the people shouted as Richard led the men up the street at a dead run.
"Out of the way!" Richard yelled as he closed the distance. This was no time for subtlety or discussions: the success of their attack depended in large part on speed. "Get out of the way! This is your only warning! Get out of the way or die!"
"Stop the hate! Stop the hate!" the people chanted as they locked arms.
They had no idea how much hate was raging through Richard. He drew the Sword of Truth. The wrath of its magic didn't come out with it, but he had enough of his own. He slowed to a trot.
"Move!" Richard called as he bore down on the people.
A plump, curly-haired woman took a step out from the others. Her round face was red with anger as she screamed. "Stop the hate! No war! Stop the hate! No war!"
"Move or die!" Richard yelled as he picked up speed.
The red-faced woman shook her fleshy fist at Richard and his men, leading an angry chant. "Murderers! Murderers! Murderers!"
On his way past her, gritting his teeth as he screamed with the fury of the attack begun, Richard took a powerful swing, lopping off the woman's head and upraised arm. Strings of blood and gore splashed across the faces behind her even as some still chanted their empty words. The head and loose arm tumbled through the crowd. A man mad the mistake of reaching for Richard's weapon, and took the full weight of a charging thrust.
Men behind Richard hit the line of evil's guardians with unrestrained violence. People armed only with their hatred for moral clarity fell bloodied, terribly injured, and dead. The line of people collapsed before the merciless charge. Some of the people, screaming their contempt, used their fists to attack Richard's men. They were met with swift and deadly steel.
At the realization that their defense of the Imperial Order's brutality would actually result in consequences to themselves, the crowd began scattering in fright, screaming curses back at Richard and his men.

And the parodies! Goodkind meets JK Rowling and Goodkind meets Tolkien.

And the classic interview quotes:

While my novels contain secondary fantasy elements, they aren’t primarily fantasy books and for that reason the vast majority of my readers are not exclusively fantasy readers but general fiction readers.

As for Richard’s feelings on democracy, it would appear that you missed one of the books in the series: SOUL OF THE FIRE. In that book Richard learned that democracy does not make something right. People use democracy as a free-floating abstraction disconnected from reality. Democracy in and of itself is not necessarily good. Gang rape, after all, is democracy in action.

I am now going to tell you something that probably no other fantasy writer would ever tell you: I’m making it up.

...

I hope that you will come to see that the magic in the books is a tool for telling a story and nothing more. Ultimately, it is not magic that is important, but what people do with that magic, how they use their unique abilities to meet challenges.

Linky.

Ayn Rand is the inventor of the objectivist philosophy. I consider her the greatest thinker since Aristotle. She made advances in the world of philosophy that no one since Aristotle has made.

Nature cannot have a value independent of mankind, and this is what the environmental movement has become: a religion. They've ascribed value to nature absent mankind. They've ascribed value to nature, and so what happens is, whatever you do to harm nature, people say, "You've harmed this good thing, that makes mankind bad." They're using that line of philosophy to hate mankind, because mankind is detrimental to nature. They've turned nature into a religion, making into something that is holy without reality. If nature has value, it's for how mankind can use it. It's incumbent upon human beings to respect nature for their own rational self-interests.

For example, poisoning a river is bad not because it hurts nature, because nature has no value in and of itself. It's bad because it [poisoning the river] hurts mankind. You poison the river and other people are going to get poisoned, and then you're infringing on their right to exist. You want clean air because you need clean air to breathe, to leave longer. Respect for the environment meant should be based on mankind's [needs].

That's in part what I'm writing about [in the Sword of Truth series]: the struggle between humans who are driven by a love of life, and people driven by a hatred of life. Sure, there are bad things about life, but that's the purpose of struggling: to change those things, to make them better. That's what I've tried to show through the books: that you can be better, you can rise up and live a life, but there are people who are mindlessly devoted to hatred, to the destruction of life, and they use any excuse to justify their own hatred, and that's all it is: hatred for their own existence, for their own inability to live their own life. The things they come up with, like sacrificing for the greater good, are just ways of lowering the standard of everyone's life.

For example, take the need for people to help others, to contribute some of their income to help the welfare of other Americans. That's their faith, so they create the income tax system. If you're not willing to go along with their faith and go along with the greater good, then they come with guns and take you to jail. They are willing to force to enforce that faith. So, Americans are, in essence, sacrificing part of their life into slavery to others. That faith is enforced by guns and jails. We're not willingly giving them part of our income; people don't like paying taxes, and justifiably so, because they're sacrificing part of their life to other people. It's this concept of sacrificing for the greater good, and that faith is being enforced by a government who has guns and jails.

In World War II, in Japan, there were no deaths of Americans by insurgence, and the reason [for that] is because America, at that time, had the courage to crush those who were enforcing evil ideas. We may have had to kill a lot of people, but it was the only way to crush those evil ideas. And because we crushed those evil ideas, an entire culture in Japan grew up to create a great, noble, free people who have become an engine of freedom and an engine of economy in the world.

You either crush evil or you don't. If you allow evil to co-exist with you, it's only going to grow. We're allowing evil to grow. We're too timid to attack evil, and make no mistake: the Islamic world wants to kill us, and sooner or later, an atomic bomb is going to go off in the United States because we don't even have the courage to name the enemy.

Ah, good times.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

Kahlan frantically tried to think as the chicken bawk-bawk-bawked.
...
With the next flash of lightning, she saw chicken feet standing between her and the crack under the door.

Okay yeah, I think I'm done here.

 

[gumboot]

In what capacity? And, more importantly, did you get a hat?

Production Runner and sometime Grip, AD and Cast Driver. No hat, but two t-shirts and a vast array of other bits and pieces during the clean-out after the show was canned.

You say that like there's something wrong with Xena.

Not at all. The world owes Xena and Hercules more than most people realise. For one, had those two TV shows not happened, LOTR would not have happened. And without LOTR an enormous amount of other films and TV shows would not have happened. Quite seriously, without "Xena", I would not be doing what I do for a living.

The difference between "Xena" and LOTS is that "Xena" presented itself as a light-hearted campy TV series, and delivered magnificently on that. LOTS was intended as, and initially presented itself as, a very adult, gritty fantasy drama. It was rapidly diluted, however, into something light-hearted and campy, while continuing to insult its audience by pretending to be a gritty adult drama.

 

[Dancing David]

No love for the Rain Wilds Chronicles?

I said it in another thread, Robin Hobb is a very underrated author. I love her books.

It would be very hard to say which of her series I love the most, but it'd be either Liveship Traders or Soldier Son.

A truly wonderful and under known author. I read the Farseer saga and found its writing what hooked me, then the plot got better, I was enamored by the third one. The Tawny man set was epic and moving.

The more recent stuff is amazing.

 

[Dancing David]

Tanith Lee's Flat Earth series and it is well plotted and well written. Despite the often meandering over prose style of Tanith Lee this series is just awesome.
(And it does not suffer from the failings of some of her other works.)

 

[Akri]

Production Runner and sometime Grip, AD and Cast Driver.

Cool.

No hat, but two t-shirts and a vast array of other bits and pieces during the clean-out after the show was canned.

Huh, I thought everyone involved got a hat. Of course I wasn't involved and I got one, so maybe they gave me yours

 

[Wudang]

I forgot Le Guin's Earthsea trilogy.

Only in silence the word,
only in dark the light,
only in dying life:
bright the hawk's flight
on the empty sky
- The Creation of Ea

 

[gumboot]

Cool.

Huh, I thought everyone involved got a hat. Of course I wasn't involved and I got one, so maybe they gave me yours

I've only ever got hats on two jobs, although one of them is really special; it's a really tacky touristy "Australia" hat signed by all the Australian cast from season 3 of "Spartacus".

T-shirts and things seem to be the standard fare on NZ jobs for some reason.

 

[Akri]

I've only ever got hats on two jobs, although one of them is really special; it's a really tacky touristy "Australia" hat signed by all the Australian cast from season 3 of "Spartacus".

Sweet!

T-shirts and things seem to be the standard fare on NZ jobs for some reason.

So long as they're comfy shirts, I'd say that's better

 

[Morrigan]

Damn, man. I go away for two weeks to see giant tortoises and blue-footed boobies and now I have piles and piles of emails to catch up on... and piles and piles of people who are Wrong on the Internet to refute.

Warning: long post ahead.

So far I can't help but notice the distinct absence of Terry Goodkind's 12-book Sword of Truth series, and Robert Jordan (and Brandon Sanderson)'s 15-book Wheel of Time series. No love for these major, best-selling, generation-crossing fantasies?

Probably because they're terrible. Well, no. Wheel of Time is just mediocre, with some good moments here and there. Sword of Truth is just the epitome of terrible, though. Randroids love the hell out of it due to its Rand worship and are blind to the atrocious writing, ridiculous plots and Mary-Sue characters.

I love Goodkind's Sword of Truth series. Faith of the Fallen may be my favorite book. However, every time I've mentioned it people go on and on about how much it sucks, usually people who haven't read them (or skimmed them) or who object to the author having a point of view (SoT has NOTHING on the Dune series when it comes to over-emphasis on philosophy).

Hahahaha no. I've read everything until Naked Empire (the why of that is a long story), and I don't inherently hate authors inserting their POV (Frank Herbert didn't do this, btw, but Heinlein sure did). Goodkind is just a flat-out awful author.

Together we've watched the two seasons of the TV series, which IMO is mostly excellent and vastly superior to most live-action fantasy fare out there. Sometimes she explains how the books are different, and in general it sounds even better than the show.

I've only seen the first episode of the show, and it was cheesy Xena-like garbage, only worse. It was bad in every way. The only reason anyone might think it's "vastly superior to most live action fantasy" out there is because there is almost NO live-action fantasy out there, because it's honestly bad if the pilot is any indication. Unless, of course, you meant it in a "so bad it's good" way, in which case I might agree, because I had many lol's watching that episode. The bulletarrow-time abuse was pretty staggering.

For these reasons I find it hard to believe that Goodkind's series "sucks" or that it's somehow "the worst books [insert name of JREF member here] has ever read". I'll reserve judgement till I actually read them, but I think that it's probably a question of personal aesthetics and ideology, rather than an objective analysis of the writing.

I'm sorry, but, no. There are very good reasons why these books are mocked so much. Very very good reasons. Tsukasa posted a bunch of them, and I can post more too.

And again, I don't get why people complain about Goodkind getting "preachy". The Dune series was a far worse offender, and the idea of an author going off on a rant about their pet philosophy is hardly new in fantasy and sci-fi. One might almost say it's symptomatic of those genera. No one seems to have any problem with the flagrant socialism in Asimove's novels. Yet when Goodkind does it, it's considered horrible. My guess is that it's because....

...he's an incompetent writer, all his books are preachy as hell (unlike Frank Herbert who isn't preachy and whose philo rants are mostly limited to one single book of his series) and because his philosophy is sophomoric and imbecilic in the extreme, and because the author is a pretentious raving douchebag? Your guess is good!

Goodkind is, ostensibly at least, an Objectivist (some issues have arisen in the past 3years that make me question it; Wizard's Fifth Rule and all). Folks on this forum tend to view Objectivism in a very bad light--as in, anything associated with the philosophy is evil by definition, even if the concepts would normally be considered perfectly acceptable. Thus, SoT must necessarily suck in their minds, regardless of the actual writing or story-telling or, in fact, any other aspect at all.

...Or not.

The SoIaF fans, on the other hand.......Well, I've heard kinder things said towards inter-racial couples by KKK members.

LOL. Yay, ASoIaF fans compared to KKK members. What's next, a Godwin?

If you want to read worse books, a number come to mind. The original Star Wars trillogy, for example. Or the later Dune novels. Or the Butlerian Jihad Dune novels. Or the Starchild trillogy.

I haven't read most of those, but I'm skeptical that they can be as bad as SoT, and the later Dune novels (not the prequels) which I have indeed read, are a million times better. Sorry, nope.

I can get why some people might not enjoy the books, but I will never understand the need to justify that dislike via exaggerations and falsehoods.

He didn't do that. He used a very mild amount of hyperbole for humour purposes.

The Mord-Sith were never portrayed as lesbians, at least not in general. Two specific Mord-Sith happened to be lesbians, but it was pretty clear that they were simply two M-S who happened to be lesbians. Cara, for example, is straight. Also, complaining about sexual diversity in fantasy is simply ridiculous. Oh, horror! Goodkind's not a homophobic coward!!!!

I'll concede that the only redeeming value of Goodkind is that he's not homophobic (then again, you gotta wonder why his choice of gay characters "just happened" to be hot leather-clad chicks... xD). Tsukasa was being somewhat hyperbolic here, though.

Second, the agiel were not magice torture dildos. Mord-Sith used them in sex, but only to increase pain (rather basic physiology). They were not sexual devices, but devices for inflicting pain. The fact that Mord-Sith used them during intercourse does not make them sexual objects; I know people who use rope during intercourse, but for some reason no one complains that wooden sailing ships are erotic.

lol, what a stretch. If the story frequently showed and/or referred to people using those sailboat ropes as instruments of sexual torture in addition to handling boats, I'm pretty sure calling that rope "magical torture sex rope" would be fairly accurate.

There was never a book where Richard was tortured by Mord-Sith while Kahlan was captured. When Kahlan got captured the Mord-Sith were on Richard's side. And there was never a time you could call them boyfriend/girlfriend. They went from team members on the same mission to betrothed to married. A pedantic point, yes, but considering the lies in your post (and there's no other word for such mischaracterizations) I consider it justified.

That's honestly hilarious. Obviously he didn't mean all these things necessarily happened in that order. Are you not familiar with... mockery and humour?

Kahlan didn't get raped very often if you read the books. ATTEMPTED rape, sure--but considering Kahlan's power it never seemed to work out well.

Again, hyperbole. Kahlan gets almost-raped on a very, very regular basis.

The writing is very good; the plot is genious; the heroes are paragons of virtue.

You can't be serious. Jesus christ... I get that you like them, and it's okay to like crap, but these statements are just so dumbfounding. (See below.)

I have given every bit as much justification for my views as you have.

No, you haven't. You have failed to explain why you think the writing is good, or why the plot is "genious" (sic), or why the heroes are virtuous. Tsukasa certainly showed evidence of otherwise, though. More on that:

- A good writer knows how to handle world-building, pacing, character development, and plot twists. Goodkind does neither of these things well. A lot of the world-building from his early books is straight out plagiarized from Jordan, for one thing. For another thing, his magic system is not at all thought through or consistent; it's made up on the spot to serve whatever he requires for his idiotic plots (good examples of that are Jagang's dream-walking, Nicholas the "Slide", Brother Narev the sorcerer). He also does this with actual characters, too, which he drops in and out. This is called Deus Ex Machina, which leads me to:
- Goodkind is inordinately fond of Deus Ex Machina. It's a bad, bad trope, a sign of a flat-out terrible writer, and Goodind uses them all the time. I could list several examples if anyone cares.
- A writer inserting his POV in a novel is nothing new, but rarely a sign of a good writer. Goodkind is especially bad at this, because he has absolutely no subtlety in doing so, and with the long, long monologues and speeches by his avatar routinely take up several pages of text, which of course means he's terrible at pacing (and fails the Writing 101 rule of "show, don't tell"). Not only that, but the way he inserts his POV is juvenile; he basically sets up straw versions of POVs he dislikes, then his hero proceeds to dismantle them. Imagine if I wrote a novel where the heroine is called Morrigan, is just like me, is said (not shown, just said) to be super smart (and probably beautiful, too!) and clever, and then she refutes a super-dumb and exaggerated version of a creationist. We're supposed to applaud her razor-sharp insights and wit, but of course, it's very sophomoric. Yet that's exactly what Goodkind is doing... except even worse, because there really are super-dumb creationists out there, but "villains" portrayed by Goodkind are nothing like actual human beings. The infamous "fire speech", anyone? A good writer would be capable of showing believable characters having believable motivations, even these characters's ideologies are different (or even incompatible) with his/her own.
- The heroes are not virtuous. They justify their atrocities in the name of their ideologies (the Straw villains sure help with that), but they still commit atrocities. The slaughter of the straw-pacifists in Naked Empire is a fantastic example of that (see Tsukasa's excerpt), as is Kahlan threatening to throw her half-sister to the mercy of a bunch of murderers and rapists (said half-sister had already experienced that and became catatonic and delirious as a result, and the virtuous heroine Kahlan is threatening to have her thrown into that rapist pit again...). I haven't read anything beyond that book, but according to reviews and summaries, it only gets worse in the later books. Yikes. The only reason the heroes can be called virtuous is if you compare them to the villains, which of course are a straw-caricature of all that is evil (see above).
- The prose is laughable. Tsukasa posted good excerpts for all to see. The Chicken that is not a Chicken is just hilariously bad. Then you have things like the coiled fury ("To her he looked like coiled fury, and like he knew how to uncoil.".... wat), raptor-gaze, "People armed only with their hatred of moral clarity", and of course, best of them all, "Richard's thing":

Richard actually felt sorry for the little Princess. The sadness for her came over him in a wave. At that feeling, he was surprised to feel the thing in him that had come awake rise up.

You read that right. His THING rose up in him!

So. Terribad prose. Mary sue characters who are never wrong, even when they commit atrocities. No sense of pacing and long long droning and repetitive speeches saying why Objectivism and Capitalism are Good and Collectivism and Socialism are Bad. Showing instead of telling. An half-assed fantasy world with most of its interesting fantasy world-building elements lifted from other authors while the rest is just made up for whatever the plot requires at that specific time. Constant use of Deus Ex Machina. Caricatural strawmen as antagonists. Yeah, he's an awesome writer all right.

Secondly, this is a thread about our favorite fantasy books. Yet for some reason, when someone says they like Goodkind people feel obliged to insult and attack the books. Note that no one is doing that with Martin's works, or Jordon's, or really anyone else's.

Because they aren't atrocious, while the Goodkind books are, and they're not pretentious douchebags purporting to write about Important Human Themes (and certainly not fantasy, no sir --- that's right, Goodkind denies he's writing fantasy, despite his works having magic spells and wizards of all sorts, a magic pixie, a dragon, etc.), whereas Goodkind is. I get that as a fan you find that hard to accept and instead prefer to invent motivations to his detractors. Oh well.

What point? The writing in SoT is mediocre; the plot idiotic; the putative heroes are loathsome.

The characters in ASoIaF are loathsome too, and I don't like that series either. But the writing is strong enough that I can understand why others find it compelling.

SoT is just plain awful.

While I agree with your SoT assessment, I can't agree with your ASoIaF one. Going even just with the POV characters, could you explain what is so loathsome about Arya, Jon Snow, Ned Stark, Daenerys, Samwell? And even if Tyrion does have a dark edge to him, since you don't like the series I assume you only read the first book and he's not "loathsome" in any way in there. I'm honestly confused by this. I would even add Catelyn and Sansa to the list of non-loathsome characters, but I already know what replies I'd get (Catelyn was mean to Jon! Sansa is spoiled and childish! and the likes)...

I've found myself more inclined to historic fiction more recently, particularly relating to interpretations of the Arthurian legend. Jack Whyte's Camulod Chronicles blow away anything in the fantasy genre as far as sheer scale and scope.

You should try Bernard Cornwell's stuff. I just finished Warlords Chronicles on my flight back from the Galapagos, and it's a wonderful, epic and awesome version of the Arthur legend. Truly glorious and highly recommended.

 

[gumboot]

You should try Bernard Cornwell's stuff. I just finished Warlords Chronicles on my flight back from the Galapagos, and it's a wonderful, epic and awesome version of the Arthur legend. Truly glorious and highly recommended.

He's one of my favourite authors.

 

[PixyMisa]

While I agree with your SoT assessment, I can't agree with your ASoIaF one. Going even just with the POV characters, could you explain what is so loathsome about Arya, Jon Snow, Ned Stark, Daenerys, Samwell? And even if Tyrion does have a dark edge to him, since you don't like the series I assume you only read the first book and he's not "loathsome" in any way in there. I'm honestly confused by this. I would even add Catelyn and Sansa to the list of non-loathsome characters, but I already know what replies I'd get (Catelyn was mean to Jon! Sansa is spoiled and childish! and the likes)...

I did say earlier that one of the characters has redeeming qualities.

ETA: It's been a while since I read it, but as I recall the only character I found in any way sympathetic was Daenerys; the rest of the cast I either didn't care about at all or actively loathed. The writing itself is exemplary, and while I was reading it, I couldn't put the first book down. But once I had finished it and paused for a moment, I found I had no interest in continuing.

So I recognise the quality of ASoIaF and can understand why people like, even love the series; it's just not for me. Contra SoT, which is objectively rubbish.

 

[Wudang]

LOL. Yay, ASoIaF fans compared to KKK members. What's next, a Godwin?

Actually the atrocity justifications reminded me of Spinrad's "The Iron Dream". As do other novels.

 

[Aepervius]

The Twelve Kingdoms series is one of my favourites. The author plays with Chinese myth, so it might not be the same category as others here. The characters are flawed, but sympathetic and grow over the journeys. While that sounds really basic, I have had a lot of trouble with that.

Twelve Kingdoms : saw the anime serie years ago. I wondered if there was an english version of the book. I'll check on amazon later thanks for the recall .